thermite and high explosives

[Liability]

Mofett's not a physicist, plus at the end of the article he even admits that the official 9/11 story isn't credible.

The two things that most Americans can agree on about 9/11 is that the official story is not credible, and that the Bush administration was hiding something.
Nuff said. Perhaps people should write their own peer reviewed study, instead of specious claims without any scientific backing.

Thermite is not just a lump of rust and a lump of aluminum. They are high tech with nanosized particles,only a handful of labs on the planet can make this stuff, so it wasn't just some anomalous finding.

The "official" "story" may not be entirely correct. It is -- as you know -- based largely on reconstructing events after the fact, using a variety of scientific methods not all of which can conclusively explain things. Terribly sorry that the attack and massive destruction causes so much difficulty in reconstructing what happened. Terribly inconvenient, that whole WE GOT ATTACKED thing.

Whether or not the 9/11 Commission in conjunction with NIST got everything right is not a valid basis upon which to hang YOUR ridiculous contentions, you moron.

NIST can be mistaken or even flatly wrong in some things, but that still doesn't mean that your whacked-out, baseless conspiracy theories have any substance or legitimacy.

Go play on YouTube.

 

[daws101]

Mofett's not a physicist, plus at the end of the article he even admits that the official 9/11 story isn't credible.

The two things that most Americans can agree on about 9/11 is that the official story is not credible, and that the Bush administration was hiding something.
Nuff said. Perhaps people should write their own peer reviewed study, instead of specious claims without any scientific backing.

Thermite is not just a lump of rust and a lump of aluminum. They are high tech with nanosized particles,only a handful of labs on the planet can make this stuff, so it wasn't just some anomalous finding.

1st IT'S NOT MOST AMERICANS: New National Poll: 36% of Americans Believe 9/11 Was an Inside Job
By Thomas Hargrove, Scripps Howard News Service Seattle
Wednesday, August 2, 2006
Straight to the Source


Like the 2004 Zogby 9/11 poll, this Scripps Howard survey directly questioned people about their belief in official US complicity, added the Mideast war as a likely motive, and found 36% in agreement. One has to suppress a bitter smile at their finding that agreement was lowest among those who read the mainstream press, but the truly encouraging aspect of this poll was its news that so much of this awakening had occurred quite recently. It also covers WTC demolition and national anger at government. All in all a fascinating read. - Ed.

More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East, according to a new Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll.

The national survey of 1,010 adults also found that anger against the federal government is at record levels, with 54 percent saying they "personally are more angry" at the government than they used to be.

Widespread resentment and alienation toward the national government appears to be fueling a growing acceptance of conspiracy theories about the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Suspicions that the 9/11 attacks were "an inside job" -- the common phrase used by conspiracy theorists on the Internet -- quickly have become nearly as popular as decades-old conspiracy theories that the federal government was responsible for President John F. Kennedy's assassination and that it has covered up proof of space aliens.

Seventy percent of people who give credence to these theories also say they've become angrier with the federal government than they used to be.

Thirty-six percent of respondents overall said it is "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or took no action to stop them "because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East."

"One out of three sounds high, but that may very well be right," said Lee Hamilton, former vice chairman of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also called the 9/11 Commission.) His congressionally appointed investigation concluded that federal officials bungled their attempts to prevent, but did not participate in, the attacks by al Qaeda five years ago.

"A lot of people I've encountered believe the U.S. government was involved," Hamilton said. "Many say the government planned the whole thing. Of course, we don't think the evidence leads that way at all."

The poll also found that 16 percent of Americans speculate that secretly planted explosives, not burning passenger jets, were the real reason the massive twin towers of the World Trade Center collapsed.

Conspiracy groups for at least two years have also questioned why the World Trade Center collapsed when fires that heavily damaged similar skyscrapers around the world did not cause such destruction. Sixteen percent said it's "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that "the collapse of the twin towers in New York was aided by explosives secretly planted in the two buildings."

Twelve percent suspect the Pentagon was struck by a military cruise missile in 2001 rather than by an airliner captured by terrorists.

That lower percentage may result from an effort by the conservative Washington-based Judicial Watch advocacy group to debunk the claim. The group filed claims under the Freedom of Information Act and got two fill loops released from Pentagon security cameras.

"Some people claim they can't see anything, but I see a plane hitting the Pentagon at incredibly high speed," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. "I see the nose of the plane clearly entering the frame of one video and the tail of the plane entering the Pentagon in the other video."

Many conspiracy Web sites have posted the video loops and report the films are inconclusive or were manipulated by the government.

"Some folks will never be convinced," Fitton said. "But I'm hoping that these videos will dissuade reasonable people from falling into a trap with these conspiracy theories."

University of Florida law professor Mark Fenster, author of the book "Conspiracy Theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture," said the poll's findings reflect public anger at the unpopular Iraq war, realization that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction and growing doubts of the veracity of the Bush administration.

"What has amazed me is not that there are conspiracy theories, but that they didn't seem to be getting any purchase among the American public until the last year or so," Fenster said. "Although the Iraq war was not directly related to the 9/11 attacks, people are now looking back at 9/11 with much more skepticism than they used to."

Conspiracy-believing participants in the poll agree their suspicions are recent.

"I certainly didn't think of conspiracies when 9/11 first happened," said Elaine Tripp, 62, of Tabernacle, N.J. "I don't know if President Bush was aware of the exact time it was going to happen. But he certainly didn't do enough to stop it. Bush was so intent on having his own little war."

Garrett Johnson, 19, of Manassas, Va., said it was "well after the fact" before he started questioning the official explanation of the attacks. "But then people I know started talking about it. And the Internet had a lot to do with this. After reading all of the different articles there, I started to think we weren't being told the truth."

The Scripps Survey Research Center at Ohio University has tracked the level of resentment people feel toward the federal government since 1995, starting shortly after Timothy McVeigh bombed the federal building in Oklahoma City. Forty-seven percent then said they, personally, feel "more angry at the federal government" than they used to. That percentage dropped to 42 percent in 1997, 34 percent in 1998 and only 12 percent shortly after 9/11 during the groundswell of patriotism and support for the government after the attacks.

But the new survey found that 77 percent say their friends and acquaintances have become angrier with government recently and 54 percent say they, themselves, have become angrier -- both record levels.

The survey also found that people who regularly use the Internet but who do not regularly use so-called "mainstream" media are significantly more likely to believe in 9/11 conspiracies. People who regularly read daily newspapers or listen to radio newscasts were especially unlikely to believe in the conspiracies.

"We know that there are a lot of people now asking questions," said Janice Matthews, executive director of 911Truth.org, one of the most sophisticated Internet sites raising doubts about official explanations of the attacks. "We didn't have the Internet after Pearl Harbor, the Gulf of Tonkin or the Kennedy assassination. But we live in different times now."

Matthews' Web site averaged 4,000 "hits" a day last year, but currently has at least 12,000 visits every 24 hours. The site, according to its online policy statement, is dedicated to showing the public that "elements within the U.S. government must have orchestrated or participated in the execution of the attacks for these to have happened the way in which they did."

Participants in the poll were asked to respond to "several serious accusations that some people have made against the federal government in recent years." Five conspiracy theories were described and participants were asked if each was "very likely, somewhat likely or unlikely."

The level of suspicion of U.S. official involvement in a 9/11 conspiracy was only slightly behind the 40 percent who suspect "officials in the federal government were directly responsible for the assassination of President Kennedy" and the 38 percent who believe "the federal government is withholding proof of the existence of intelligent life from other planets."

The poll found that a majority of young adults give at least some credence to a 9/11 conspiracy compared to less than a fourth of people 65 or older. Members of racial and ethnic minorities, people with only a high school education and Democrats were especially likely to suspect federal involvement in 9/11.

The survey was conducted by telephone from July 6-24 at the Scripps Survey Research Center at the University of Ohio under a grant from the Scripps Howard Foundation. The poll has a margin of error of 4 percentage points.

Thomas Hargrove is a reporter for Scripps Howard News Service. Guido H. Stempel III is director of the Scripps Survey Research Center at Ohio University.

© 1998-2006 Seattle Post-Intelligencer

SINCE YOUR % IS WAY BELOW "MOST" WHICH WOULD BE 80-100% IT AND THE OTHER INFO CAN NOT BE CONSIDER VIABLE.

 

[daws101]

only in your mind. no evidence = no facts

Perfect example of why the NIST explanation has been torn to shreds.
Proof, facts and scientific studies accompanied by peer reviewed papers are evidence that the 9-11 destruction of the WTC buildings were not, and could not have been fully attributed to fire and gravity alone.
You would have to be an idiot to not realize this by now...of course the only way to keep your mind from suffering the cognitive dissonance you are afraid of experiencing is to continue to ignore the obvious.
You would do well to try to understand the definitions of words you have problems with yourself, as you continue to portray us who do understand facts, and evidence, and proof as the ones who don't understand what we are reading.
Of course when you don't even have the basic mental skills to observe the way the buildings collapsed, and realize that 3 buildings collapsing the way they did in one day, for the first time in history, ...well....that partially explains your handicap.[/QUOTE]

 

[daws101]

 

[daws101]

Mofett's not a physicist, plus at the end of the article he even admits that the official 9/11 story isn't credible.

The two things that most Americans can agree on about 9/11 is that the official story is not credible, and that the Bush administration was hiding something.
Nuff said. Perhaps people should write their own peer reviewed study, instead of specious claims without any scientific backing.

Thermite is not just a lump of rust and a lump of aluminum. They are high tech with nanosized particles,only a handful of labs on the planet can make this stuff, so it wasn't just some anomalous finding.

lying sack o shit
he does not!:"The two things that most Americans can agree on about 9/11 is that the official story is not credible, and that the Bush administration was hiding something. But that’s where agreement ends"cheery picked.

 

[daws101]

[cognitive dissonance is part of cluster of phenomena that are often referred to as cognitive biases, although there are other terms that are sometimes used. Cognitive bias is not some powerful mind-altering experience. In fact, it would be a common part of most people's day. Most of the the time that cognitive bias occurs you would probably never know because it would have lead to a better result. For example, if you're looking for the exit to the football stadium after the game is finished, you follow everyone else. It's a really good strategy. And you're not all messed up. And you have a really clear idea of what just happened. In fact, you might even know that the reason you went 'that way' to find the gate was because you were just following everyone else.

The same thing is true with cognitive dissonance. The whole idea of cognitive dissonance originated with the response of Leon Festinger to the dominance in the psychology of the time to learning theory. In one of the most brilliant examples of science in psychology, Festinger suggested a situation in which more reward would result in a less positive response to the stimulus. He did this by suggesting that a cognitive mechanism would function instead of a reward mechanism. This is where the adjective 'cognitive' comes into play.

Ironically, Festinger went on to explore the social implications of his discovery. You can read all about this in his book When Prophecy Fails about the response of a doomsday cult to a failed end-of-the-world prophecy. The significance of this is that the cult members knew exactly what had happened. Their description of what happened would not be much different from anyone else. Only their explanation for why this had happened would differ.

Over on this thread, some Truthers have been talking about the large number of names on a list compiled by Richard Gage that refers to his group AE911T. It is often called a petition. The list is supposed to show the many building experts who agree with Gage and his gang that the WTC Buildings were exploded with some sort of substance.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Mofett's not a physicist, plus at the end of the article he even admits that the official 9/11 story isn't credible.

The two things that most Americans can agree on about 9/11 is that the official story is not credible, and that the Bush administration was hiding something.
Nuff said. Perhaps people should write their own peer reviewed study, instead of specious claims without any scientific backing.

Thermite is not just a lump of rust and a lump of aluminum. They are high tech with nanosized particles,only a handful of labs on the planet can make this stuff, so it wasn't just some anomalous finding.

If they are so sure that therXte is in the dust, why is Herrit afraid to test in in an inert gas like argon to prove it is self-oxidizing?

 

[Mr. Jones]

Mofett's not a physicist, plus at the end of the article he even admits that the official 9/11 story isn't credible.

The two things that most Americans can agree on about 9/11 is that the official story is not credible, and that the Bush administration was hiding something.
Nuff said. Perhaps people should write their own peer reviewed study, instead of specious claims without any scientific backing.

Thermite is not just a lump of rust and a lump of aluminum. They are high tech with nanosized particles,only a handful of labs on the planet can make this stuff, so it wasn't just some anomalous finding.

If they are so sure that therXte is in the dust, why is Herrit afraid to test in in an inert gas like argon to prove it is self-oxidizing?

If the NIST would have done their job thoroughly and accurately, much controversy could have been avoided and at least the science part of 9-11 might have been answered.
NIST has their own Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology (CNST 2008). Additionally, NIST’s Reactive Flows Group did research on nanostructured materials and high temperature reactions in the mid-nineties.

Critiquing certain aspects of testing may be a good thing to aid in discovering answers, but the point is that no matter what, these highly sophisticated chips had no business in WTC dust. As Dr. Farrer explained, the DSC 'popped off' while paint chips just fizzle and crumple, yielding a wide peak, whereas the NT chips show a narrow, energetic peak, just like Tillotson's nanothermite, which was also tested in air. And not in vacuum or an 'inert gas'.
I haven't run into anyone that is 100% satisfied with the testing, but we all agree that our disappointment with the load of shit that NIST produced, and had the nerve to call a scientific investigation, is much greater.

In any case, it is important for those seeking the truth about 9-11 to consider what organizations and people had access to the technologies that were used to accomplish the deceptive demolition of the WTC buildings. It is also important to recognize the links between those who had access to the technologies, those who had access to the buildings, and those who produced the clearly false official reports.
The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and Nano-Thermites

 

[Mr. Jones]

Mofett's not a physicist, plus at the end of the article he even admits that the official 9/11 story isn't credible.

The two things that most Americans can agree on about 9/11 is that the official story is not credible, and that the Bush administration was hiding something.
Nuff said. Perhaps people should write their own peer reviewed study, instead of specious claims without any scientific backing.

Thermite is not just a lump of rust and a lump of aluminum. They are high tech with nanosized particles,only a handful of labs on the planet can make this stuff, so it wasn't just some anomalous finding.

lying sack o shit
he does not!:"The two things that most Americans can agree on about 9/11 is that the official story is not credible, and that the Bush administration was hiding something. But that’s where agreement ends"cheery picked.

cognitive dissonance indeed

 

[Mr. Jones]

only in your mind. no evidence = no facts

Perfect example of why the NIST explanation has been torn to shreds.
Proof, facts and scientific studies accompanied by peer reviewed papers are evidence that the 9-11 destruction of the WTC buildings were not, and could not have been fully attributed to fire and gravity alone.
You would have to be an idiot to not realize this by now...of course the only way to keep your mind from suffering the cognitive dissonance you are afraid of experiencing is to continue to ignore the obvious.
You would do well to try to understand the definitions of words you have problems with yourself, as you continue to portray us who do understand facts, and evidence, and proof as the ones who don't understand what we are reading.
Of course when you don't even have the basic mental skills to observe the way the buildings collapsed, and realize that 3 buildings collapsing the way they did in one day, for the first time in history, ...well....that partially explains your handicap.

[/QUOTE]

Your continued misuse of the quote function, and constantly misquoting is an obvious manifestation of your mental handicap. You bring nothing of value to any conversation on these forums.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Mofett's not a physicist, plus at the end of the article he even admits that the official 9/11 story isn't credible.

The two things that most Americans can agree on about 9/11 is that the official story is not credible, and that the Bush administration was hiding something.
Nuff said. Perhaps people should write their own peer reviewed study, instead of specious claims without any scientific backing.

Thermite is not just a lump of rust and a lump of aluminum. They are high tech with nanosized particles,only a handful of labs on the planet can make this stuff, so it wasn't just some anomalous finding.

If they are so sure that therXte is in the dust, why is Herrit afraid to test in in an inert gas like argon to prove it is self-oxidizing?

If the NIST would have done their job thoroughly and accurately, much controversy could have been avoided and at least the science part of 9-11 might have been answered.
NIST has their own Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology (CNST 2008). Additionally, NIST’s Reactive Flows Group did research on nanostructured materials and high temperature reactions in the mid-nineties.

Critiquing certain aspects of testing may be a good thing to aid in discovering answers, but the point is that no matter what, these highly sophisticated chips had no business in WTC dust. As Dr. Farrer explained, the DSC 'popped off' while paint chips just fizzle and crumple, yielding a wide peak, whereas the NT chips show a narrow, energetic peak, just like Tillotson's nanothermite, which was also tested in air. And not in vacuum or an 'inert gas'.
I haven't run into anyone that is 100% satisfied with the testing, but we all agree that our disappointment with the load of shit that NIST produced, and had the nerve to call a scientific investigation, is much greater.

In any case, it is important for those seeking the truth about 9-11 to consider what organizations and people had access to the technologies that were used to accomplish the deceptive demolition of the WTC buildings. It is also important to recognize the links between those who had access to the technologies, those who had access to the buildings, and those who produced the clearly false official reports.
The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and Nano-Thermites

No, the "highly sophisticated chips" were primer and anti-corrosion paint. Which is why they ignited at a far lower temperature than thermXte. And that is why they won't test in an inert gas, because they know their "thermXte" chips won't ignite at all under those conditions.

By the way, NIST was tasked with doing a structural engineering analysis, not a criminal investigation, so they wouldn't be looking for explosives, thermXte, or space beams. That investigation would have been done by the FBI.

 

[daws101]

Mofett's not a physicist, plus at the end of the article he even admits that the official 9/11 story isn't credible.

The two things that most Americans can agree on about 9/11 is that the official story is not credible, and that the Bush administration was hiding something.
Nuff said. Perhaps people should write their own peer reviewed study, instead of specious claims without any scientific backing.

Thermite is not just a lump of rust and a lump of aluminum. They are high tech with nanosized particles,only a handful of labs on the planet can make this stuff, so it wasn't just some anomalous finding.

If they are so sure that therXte is in the dust, why is Herrit afraid to test in in an inert gas like argon to prove it is self-oxidizing?

If the NIST would have done their job thoroughly and accurately, much controversy could have been avoided and at least the science part of 9-11 might have been answered.
NIST has their own Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology (CNST 2008). Additionally, NIST’s Reactive Flows Group did research on nanostructured materials and high temperature reactions in the mid-nineties.

Critiquing certain aspects of testing may be a good thing to aid in discovering answers, but the point is that no matter what, these highly sophisticated chips had no business in WTC dust. As Dr. Farrer explained, the DSC 'popped off' while paint chips just fizzle and crumple, yielding a wide peak, whereas the NT chips show a narrow, energetic peak, just like Tillotson's nanothermite, which was also tested in air. And not in vacuum or an 'inert gas'.
I haven't run into anyone that is 100% satisfied with the testing, but we all agree that our disappointment with the load of shit that NIST produced, and had the nerve to call a scientific investigation, is much greater.

In any case, it is important for those seeking the truth about 9-11 to consider what organizations and people had access to the technologies that were used to accomplish the deceptive demolition of the WTC buildings. It is also important to recognize the links between those who had access to the technologies, those who had access to the buildings, and those who produced the clearly false official reports.
The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and Nano-Thermites

more twoofer shit....not fact!

 

[daws101]

Mofett's not a physicist, plus at the end of the article he even admits that the official 9/11 story isn't credible.

The two things that most Americans can agree on about 9/11 is that the official story is not credible, and that the Bush administration was hiding something.
Nuff said. Perhaps people should write their own peer reviewed study, instead of specious claims without any scientific backing.

Thermite is not just a lump of rust and a lump of aluminum. They are high tech with nanosized particles,only a handful of labs on the planet can make this stuff, so it wasn't just some anomalous finding.

lying sack o shit
he does not!:"The two things that most Americans can agree on about 9/11 is that the official story is not credible, and that the Bush administration was hiding something. But that’s where agreement ends"cheery picked.

cognitive dissonance indeed

only in your neuron deficient mind.

Cognitive dissonance is a discomfort caused by holding conflicting ideas simultaneously. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance. They do this by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and actions.[2] Dissonance is also reduced by justifying, blaming, and denying. The phrase was coined by Leon Festinger in his 1956 book When Prophecy Fails, which chronicled the followers of a UFO cult as reality clashed with their fervent beliefs.[3][4] It is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology. A closely related term, cognitive disequilibrium, was coined by Jean Piaget to refer to the experience of a discrepancy between something new and something already known or believed.

Experience can clash with expectations, as, for example, with buyer's remorse following the purchase of an expensive item. In a state of dissonance, people may feel surprise,[2] dread, guilt, anger, or embarrassment. People are biased to think of their choices as correct, despite any contrary evidence. This bias gives dissonance theory its predictive power, shedding light on otherwise puzzling irrational and destructive behavior.

A classical example of this idea (and the origin of the expression "sour grapes") is expressed in the fable The Fox and the Grapes by Aesop (ca. 620–564 BCE). In the story, a fox sees some high-hanging grapes and wishes to eat them. When the fox is unable to think of a way to reach them, he surmises that the grapes are probably not worth eating, as they must not be ripe or that they are sour. This example follows a pattern: one desires something, finds it unattainable, and reduces one's dissonance by criticizing it. Jon Elster calls this pattern "adaptive preference formation."[1]

a spot on definition of mrs.jones.

 

[daws101]

7 WHAT ABOUT ALL THOSE UNIGNITED NANOTHERMITES THEY FOUND IN THE DUST SAMPLES IN THAT EXPERIMENT? Niels Harritt, Steven Jones and other 9/11 controlled demolition theorists claim to have found nanothermite particles in dust samples from the World Trade Center. They made sure the dust samples were untainted, and used advanced instruments to measure what happened when these tiny red-grey chips were heated up.

Thermites reach temperatures of around 4500° and have their own oxygen supply when they burn, so they can burn underwater. Harritt, Jones, et. al. therefore should have heated up the chips in a nitrogen or argon atmosphere to eliminate the possibility that regular hydrocarbons were burning. They also failed to take the carbon-based products out of the mix, so what we may well be seeing is some kind of carbon-based product burning in oxygen. They compared the sudden energy spike of their burning chips with the spikes of known nanothermites, and found that their chips ignited at around 150° C. lower than the known nanothermites, and the energy release was off between their chips and the nanothermites by a factor of at least two. Yet they called this a match for nanothermite!

Attempts to independently replicate this experiment have been dismal. Mark Basile, who appeared in the acknowledgments of the original study, burned the chips in air, replicating the error of the original experiment and not even measuring the energy released. A chemist named Frédéric Henry-Couannier got another dust sample from the original experimenters and wrote, “Eventually the presence of nanothermite could not be confirmed.” The R.J. Lee Company did a 2003 study on the dust and didn’t find thermitic material.


Major fires on most floors of World Trade Centre Building 7 were much worse on the side facing the Twin Towers’ collapses.


read more at:Skeptic » eSkeptic » Wednesday, September 7th, 2011

 

[cooky]

The Open Chemical Physics Journal is not a credible scientific source. Until the truther movement can produce discourse worthy of publication in reputable academic periodicals it is nothing more than unsubstantiated hyperbole and rhetoric. There is no credible evidence that thermite or nano-thermite were present in the WTC towers. Whats more, thermitic compounds are rarely, if ever used in a manner hypothesized by the truth movement. Ultimately, the 9/11 truth movement is supported by little more than a bunch of websites and youtube videos.

 

[Mr. Jones]

No, the "highly sophisticated chips" were primer and anti-corrosion paint. Which is why they ignited at a far lower temperature than thermXte. And that is why they won't test in an inert gas, because they know their "thermXte" chips won't ignite at all under those conditions.

I suppose if someone actually told you that paint was indeed explosive or flammable you wouldn't think twice about painting your home with that paint? Do you know of any paint on the market that ignites or explodes?

By the way, NIST was tasked with doing a structural engineering analysis, not a criminal investigation, so they wouldn't be looking for explosives, thermXte, or space beams. That investigation would have been done by the FBI.

Among the goals NIST states it had-
The goals of the investigation of the WTC disaster were:

* To investigate the building construction, the materials used, and the technical conditions that contributed to the outcome of the WTC disaster.
Among the -
The specific objectives were:

* Determine why and how WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed following the initial impacts of the aircraft and why and how WTC 7 collapsed;
WTC Disaster Study

The findings of the thermitic material/chips should have been something NIST found, but of course they did not do a proper study for all possibilities of the collapses like they stated.
So you piss and moan about the work the independent scientists did, but are just fine with NIST doing a half assed study/investigation on the causes of the destruction, and not following through on their stated objectives?
Love how you say ordinary paint ignites

 

[Mr. Jones]

The Open Chemical Physics Journal is not a credible scientific source. Until the truther movement can produce discourse worthy of publication in reputable academic periodicals it is nothing more than unsubstantiated hyperbole and rhetoric. There is no credible evidence that thermite or nano-thermite were present in the WTC towers. Whats more, thermitic compounds are rarely, if ever used in a manner hypothesized by the truth movement. Ultimately, the 9/11 truth movement is supported by little more than a bunch of websites and youtube videos.

Perhaps you could explain how the buildings crashed to the ground in seconds through the path of most resistance?

IF it is so easy to publish in Bentham Scientific journals, or if these are "vanity publications" (note: there is no factual basis for these charges) -- then why don't the objectors write up their objections and get them peer-reviewed and published?? The fact is, it is not easy, as serious objectors will find out.

 

[Liability]

No, the "highly sophisticated chips" were primer and anti-corrosion paint. Which is why they ignited at a far lower temperature than thermXte. And that is why they won't test in an inert gas, because they know their "thermXte" chips won't ignite at all under those conditions.

I suppose if someone actually told you that paint was indeed explosive or flammable you wouldn't think twice about painting your home with that paint? Do you know of any paint on the market that ignites or explodes?

* * * *

Evidently the idiot known as Mr. Jones imagines that house paint is not flammable and that when ignited it cannot explode.

So much for his credibility.

 

[daws101]

No, the "highly sophisticated chips" were primer and anti-corrosion paint. Which is why they ignited at a far lower temperature than thermXte. And that is why they won't test in an inert gas, because they know their "thermXte" chips won't ignite at all under those conditions.

I suppose if someone actually told you that paint was indeed explosive or flammable you wouldn't think twice about painting your home with that paint? Do you know of any paint on the market that ignites or explodes?

By the way, NIST was tasked with doing a structural engineering analysis, not a criminal investigation, so they wouldn't be looking for explosives, thermXte, or space beams. That investigation would have been done by the FBI.

Among the goals NIST states it had-
The goals of the investigation of the WTC disaster were:

* To investigate the building construction, the materials used, and the technical conditions that contributed to the outcome of the WTC disaster.
Among the -
The specific objectives were:

* Determine why and how WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed following the initial impacts of the aircraft and why and how WTC 7 collapsed;
WTC Disaster Study

The findings of the thermitic material/chips should have been something NIST found, but of course they did not do a proper study for all possibilities of the collapses like they stated.
So you piss and moan about the work the independent scientists did, but are just fine with NIST doing a half assed study/investigation on the causes of the destruction, and not following through on their stated objectives?
Love how you say ordinary paint ignites

5 WHAT ABOUT THOSE BILLIONS OF IRON MICROSPHERES THAT R.J. LEE FOUND IN A DUST ANALYSIS THAT PROVES THE THEORY THAT THE IRON IN THE BUILDINGS WAS MELTED BY THERMITE? Thermite would leave tons of formerly melted iron blobs, not just microspheres. But in the 1970s, while workers welded thousands of steel beams together, hot microspheres were splattered everywhere. Concrete has fly ash in it, and I have a photo of iron-rich spheres in Tolk fly ash in my YouTube video response. Even if the microspheres were created in the fires on 9/11, the R.J. Lee dust study said, “Considering the high temperatures reached during the destruction of the WTC … Iron-rich spheres … would be expected to be present in the Dust.”6

6 WHAT ABOUT THE SULFIDIZED STEEL THAT MELTED AND THAT FEMA FOUND BUT WHICH NIST IGNORED IN THEIR REPORT? NIST didn’t ignore it. Jonathan Barnett at FEMA studied two pieces of sulfidized steel, which is not enough to explain the collapse. NIST determined that neither piece came from a supporting column in the collapse zone so it couldn’t have contributed to the collapse.7 Sulfidized steel melts at temperatures 1000° lower than regular steel so it could have “melted” in a regular office fire. And the “intergranular melting” FEMA discovered is not like melting as we know it anyway; it’s more like corrosion on an almost microscopic scale occurring along the boundaries between the crystals or grains of a metal. The technical description for what happened is “intergranular melting, high temperature corrosion via sulphidation, oxidation, and decarburisation leading to a liquid Iron Oxide Suflur mix from grain boundary melting.” And while Jonathan Barnett would like to see more research on this, he does not support the controlled demolition theory.

 

[daws101]

The Open Chemical Physics Journal is not a credible scientific source. Until the truther movement can produce discourse worthy of publication in reputable academic periodicals it is nothing more than unsubstantiated hyperbole and rhetoric. There is no credible evidence that thermite or nano-thermite were present in the WTC towers. Whats more, thermitic compounds are rarely, if ever used in a manner hypothesized by the truth movement. Ultimately, the 9/11 truth movement is supported by little more than a bunch of websites and youtube videos.

Perhaps you could explain how the buildings crashed to the ground in seconds through the path of most resistance?

IF it is so easy to publish in Bentham Scientific journals, or if these are "vanity publications" (note: there is no factual basis for these charges) -- then why don't the objectors write up their objections and get them peer-reviewed and published?? The fact is, it is not easy, as serious objectors will find out.

3 WHAT ABOUT THE ALMOST FREE-FALL COLLAPSE OF THE TWIN TOWERS? The key is the “almost” modifier. If I told you I was making almost $100,000 and you found out I was making only $67,000, you’d say I was exaggerating. So stop exaggerating the collapse speed of the WTC Towers! The 80,000 tons of structural steel slowed down the collapses of the Twin Towers to about ⅔ (two-thirds) of free-fall.3 And the core collapsed at about 40% of free-fall speed, coming down last.4 According to Richard Gage: “To bring a building symmetrically down, what we have to do is remove the core columns.” But on 9/11 the stronger core columns came down last, which violates this supposed most fundamental rule of controlled demolition.


On 9/11, massive steel objects smashed into neighboring buildings accompanied by winds at speeds up to 482mph. Shown here a heavy beam from the World Trade Center hangs from a nearby building.
4 WHAT ABOUT THOSE EXPLOSIVE SQUIBS TWENTY STORIES BELOW THE COLLAPSE POINT, AND THOSE HEAVY METAL OBJECTS FLYING HUNDREDS OF FEET THROUGH THE AIR? During the collapse, one half million cubic feet of air per floor was pushed outwards at the rate of twelve floors per second, creating a “hurricane wind” in the building as reported by survivors, and blowing out windows, and with them the smoke from the fires and other objects